At the press conference, Rutgers officials made no mention of their dispute with the Big East. But court papers show university lawyers filed the lawsuit less than 20 minutes before the Big Ten announcement.

They mean business, and they could very well leave the conference with more than having stayed in it!

Is that right. Come back BSU and SDSU, I bet we could make 2.5 w/ them plus have a much better basketball conf w/ more ncaa credits. BSU wouldn't have to pay 750K to the BW every year.

It makes sense.

If Boise St. has to pay $750,000 per year to be in the Big West, where they won't make much money, it's a loss every year that needs to be factored into their bottom line.

Have to think that if the MWC were able to bring back Boise St. and SDSU and added Houston and SMU as members to get Dallas/Houston TV access, that their negotiation leverage for a new TV contract would be good enough to warrant a raise.

Would it be enough to crack $4.19 million? Maybe, when you factor in travel costs. Maybe not.

The part about trying to lean on Urban Meyer because of his sister's connections KILLS me, and he, naturally, did not help (either his selfish doing or because OSU advised him not to). And lobbying advice?!

Agree, that was a strange comment. It appears so indirect, uninfluential, and tacky.

Sure schools do PR work and make high level contacts (President to Presidents, AD to ADs', political connections and endorsements, etc.), to further garner consideration and favor. But Urban Myer via his sister? It's not some recommendation to get to new Cincy fb Coach Tommy Turbeville to hire a former Ohio State graduate assistant to be Cincy's new defensive backs coach or something like it.

I don't understand how they could be pissed about adding Tulane. (I mean, I understand why they wouldn't want Tulane completely. But) IF YOU HAVE SEVEN OF ELEVEN VOTES, HOW CAN THEIR ADMISSION BE AGAINST YOUR WISHES?

I don't understand how they could be pissed about adding Tulane. (I mean, I understand why they wouldn't want Tulane completely. But) IF YOU HAVE SEVEN OF ELEVEN VOTES, HOW CAN THEIR ADMISSION BE AGAINST YOUR WISHES?

It's probably a matter of the commish pushing it through for the benefit of a better tV contract and the basketball schools not having any time to really object. They were part of the hiring process and the commish, being a TV exec, has nearly absolute rights with this process.

Consider it buyers remorse. Once the 7 schools realized that they just added a very bad basketball program on top of the other poorer programs they've added, and that come next year, they are out of the mix on everything regarding control, they need to evaluate everything now.

What is amazing is that the 7 schools have no clue if Temple's vote is for football decisions only or all decisions. So they might have dropped the ball on that one and given up voting control with the Temple addition. So if the 7 want to leave, it is likely that they will have to forfeit all Big East money and the Big East name.

I'm thinking back to when Dave Gavitt came up with the 8 + 8 Big East concept, back in 2003, when Miami, Va. Tech, then BC left for the ACC.

And the rules about "vesting" of the NCAA tournament BB "Units" came up. Basically, the money a school earns in NCAA tournament is in "units" (1 for making the "64", 1 more for making the "32", 1 more for making the "Sweet 16", 1 more for the "Elite 8".... )This money is doled out by the NCAA over approx. 6 years.My understanding was that back in 2003, when the Big East received the money from the NCAA, they immediately paid the school.However money earned in the 2003 tournament would be paid out in 2004, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09...And when Miami, Va. Tech left officially on July 1, 2004, they were forced to leave the 05-09 money behind in the BE.I don't hink this wa a big deal, since neaither had done anything in the NCAA BB tourney.BC left the following year, and DID have to leave money behind.

My recollection (and I could be wrong as far as what made it into their by-laws, etc.) is that right after that Mike Tranghese and the new 16 changed the vesting, so that when NCAA turney money was earned, all of that money (including future payments) became the property of the school, starting in 2004 or 2005.This new rule was phased in.So by 2010, the Big East had paid out all the money earned from the 2003 or 2004 tourney, and by 2010 all new money received from the NCAA was property of the school, and not the BE no longer had any rights to retain it.So I'm surprised to hear this being an obstacle at this point.

Another point - back around 2005, a bunch of meeting minutes became public, relating to the reorganization of the Big East ater teh 3 defections.Mike Tranghese gave an interview, and was asked specifically about the BE splitting at some point, along FB and non-FB lines.He said soething to the effect "I have a document in my office, that the league members ae free to review, which describes how such a split will work."Which sounded somewhat secretive... But when the league went to 8 + 8, it was set up with provisions for splitting into 2 conferences.So, I'm thinking that the 7 BB schools, UConn, Cincy, and USF SHOULD KNOW what those provisions are... or their lawyers really didn't perform their "due dilignence".

If the league were to dissolve, another concern is "how are all these entrance and exit fees dealt with" ? THAT may be the money that will be forfeited !!!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum